I know many of you ask me about how the Alumni Club (CAC RACING LLC) is doing and when are they getting a new horse since Mr Lexis was claimed so…
They recently purchased 50% of a pair our of California.
Dixie Gambler (Dixie Chatter-Improvising Gal-In Excess) 3YO gelding
Kissin Katy (Tribal Rule-Kissout-Kissin Kris) 2YO filly
Both are unraced but have shown a lot of potential. They are working in CA now waiting for their ride and should get to Canterbury in about 10-days. However they won’t be ready to make their first starts until Hawthorne.
Canterbury Racing Club 
Thanks for keeping us posted!!
Congratulations and good luck to you and the CAC! It should be a fun experience for everybody to own a couple of young unraced horses. Between all the dreams of unlimited potential and the true ownership experience (good and bad) the group seems to be getting the opportunity that the club was originally created for.
I would respectfully disagree. The Club is designed as an educational experience to try and let people know what it’s like to race a horse. Young, untried horses would be detrimental to that mission. If you have to back off on them because of injury or immaturity then the Club has no horse to race. Racing younger horses takes time, which the Club doesn’t have.
With their being no downside risk for the people involved in the Club then it has to be run a different way in order to work within the money allotted. There is no room for risk taking or ambitious placing. The people who joined the group are assuming a lot of risk and outlaying 4x more money. Six times actually with the money they all put in after the Lexis claim. Clubbers have no risk and minimal investment.
We try to teach as much as we can and get as close to the experience as we can get given the parameters. Believe me, there is a lot of stress in horse ownership that the Club doesn’t have. Waiting for a race as the training funds dwindle; hoping to hit the board so you don’t have to dig into your own pocket for additional money; these are experiences that the Clubbers, by design, are immune to.
I completely agree that the Club does not exactly mimic horse ownership but also would add that it simply can’t within it’s parameters – and that’s okay. Folks that are ready for more have the alumni group(s) to join – but along with that comes the full associated risks of ownership.
Ted, I guess I did not express my thought very well. I was talking abt the Cby Alumni Club (CAC) not the Cby Racing Club (CRC) . I’m aware the CAC has financial exposure as well as potential for profit and goes beyond the calendar year end.
I was just trying to express some interest and support for the alumni group, albeit clumsily.
Once again good luck to you and the CAC members going forward and whatever horses you race.
No worries and we all appreciate it. Sometimes the use of ‘club’ and ‘group’ gets confusing for me! See you tomorrow!
Hi. I understand that this is CRC and that CAC is a private group, but I am curious about the “mechanics” of an established group entering into a 50% ownership arrangement, for two horses in this case, with another person or group, as related to educational horse ownership knowledge.
Generically speaking, is the other 50% ownership party a single or group investor from outside of Minnesota? If so, how does that work? Did the 50% new partner (single or group) become an active participant in CAC in terms of costs and pay-outs and racing decisions, or is it more of a contingency fee, down the road sort of thing, and they get pay-outs if the horses get to that level? Curious about those “nuts and bolts” sorts of things.
I’ll answer in general terms. Specifics belonging to CAC is their business.
Two groups, individuals, companies, etc can partner on a horse without becoming part of each other’s partnership. Each owner owns 1/2, 60/40, 70/30 – whatever the arrangement is – and is separately responsible for their share of expenses and receives their share of earnings regardless of level. Any time a group of mine has partnered with someone else, we receive a bill from the trainer/lay-up facility/vet for only our portion of the horse(s) and only receive our share of the purse into our account.
Thanks for that info.
My question about partnership in MN or out was merely wondering about licensing and not prying. So lets say a racing group in MN partners with a racing group in Nebraska to race a horse first in Iowa and then Florida. Does that fact they are licensed individually in NE and MN mean all is good to go or is there a step involved when the horse ships out to race in another state. Or is it just the trainer that needs to be licensed in the state the horse is raced in?
All states have their own licensing rules and each group would need to be licensed, in your example, in IA and FL. Also in MN and NE. In MN, the state goes a step further and requires that both groups register together as well – other states may as well. FL, by way of contrast, only requires that each group be licensed and not licensed together. The principles involved would have to make sure they are compliant before they can race. The trainer of record, also, would need to be licensed everywhere they run as well.
Got it. Thanks again for the explanations.
You betcha. That’s why we’re here! As an editorial comment, it would be TERRIFIC if there was one true national license. There is currently a “multi-jurisdictional” license but it doesn’t include a lot of states. The time, effort and money it takes to race in 3 or 4 (or more) states can really get out of hand – especially understanding the nuances of each state’s rules. Fortunately, I can honestly say that anywhere that I have had a question or needed guidance, the licensing people in OK, FL, MN, IL, IA, CA and OH (states where I have raced) have been terrifically helpful and remarkably patient!
This was a very informative discussion. Thanks for the insight!!
That’s awesome! I feel like there hasn’t been a lot of Q&A this years I’m glad this helped!